Teacher-related use of Finnish

The participants linked Finnish use to the teacher’s inability to express oneself in the target language. In other words, the participants felt that Finnish can be employed when psycholinguistic problems arise. This term is adopted from Edmonson (2004:165), who explains that psycholinguistic code-switching occurs when the speaker is faced with a lack of knowledge or skills or when target language use is not automatized enough. In other words, the foreign language competence of the teacher is the key issue here. In the first excerpt is a reply produced when asked on what basis the language choices are made when planning lessons. In the second excerpt an unsuccessful language choice is described. In both excerpts it is implied that problems in expressing oneself in the target language result in L1 use.

Excerpt 23

Aina kyllä tavallaan lähden siitä, että miten mä voisin nyt tän vetää enkuks, tai jos se tuntuu hirveen hankalalta, ni sitten suomeksi.

I always try to think how I could do this in English, or if it feels really hard then in Finnish.

Excerpt 24

Jotku vähän hankalammat tehtävänannot, missä on niinku monta just alakohtaa, esimerkiks “nyt teet näin, sit seuraavaks näin ja sit teet näin ja sit vielä ton”, ni sit jotenki tuntuu, että.. Joskus ku on ehkä itelleki ollu se sillee niinku epäselvä se

tehtävänanto, tai sillee niinku joo, pään sisällä ehkä selvä itelleki, mut sillee että sit ku se pitäs suullistaa ni se tuleeki sillee ”öö öö, sitten eiku siis niinku tällee näin”. Ja sit jos sä enkuks koitat alkaa sitä, jos sä oot vielä ite vähä epävarma siitä, ni sillo kyllä ne oppilaatki on että ”mitä, tosta ei nyt oikeen ehkä saa selvää” ja sillee. Et sillo on ehkä helpompi, on ollu, tuntunu helpommalta niinku sanoo suomeks.

Some a bit more difficult instructions for tasks, where there are many phases, for example “now you do this, and then like this and then like this and then that one”, then it somehow feels that.. Sometimes when you feel that the instructions are still unclear maybe even to yourself, or ok, they may be clear in your mind but when you try to say it, it comes out as “umm umm, and then, no I mean like this”. And then if you try to say it in English and you’re a bit uncertain about it, then the pupils will be like “what, I don’t really get that” and so on. In those situations it is maybe easier to, it has been, has felt easier to say it in Finnish.

As excerpts 23 and 24 reveal, the participants felt that the teacher has the possibility to resort to Finnish in order to handle problems which may arise when trying to express oneself in the target language. It was also implied that the teacher may not always be as prepared as one could be (excerpt 24). Based on this it could be claimed that the uncertainty and not knowing how to express oneself could be avoided with more preparation. Still, one cannot predict what will happen during the lesson and what kinds of speech situations will arise because of the dynamic nature of the classroom. Be it as it may, the excerpts presented above demonstrate that one of the roles of Finnish relates to overcoming the inability to express oneself in the foreign language. Bateman (2008), too, found that student teachers resorted to the L1 when faced with the limitations of their own linguistic skills. Similarly, Yletyinen’s study (2004) revealed that code-switching occurred when the teacher did not know the needed TL expression.

5.3.2 Learner-related uses

The second category of L1 uses is learner-related. Pupil comprehension received attention from the participants, according to whom Finnish can be employed in order to ensure that the pupils understand the message being conveyed by the teacher. The views of Edmonson (2004:175) and Freeman and Freeman (1998:211) are in line with the participants’ comments: they promote employing the L1 for the sake of learner comprehension. In addition, Wilkerson (2008) and Littlewood and Yu (2009), for instance, found that teachers use the L1 in order to ensure understanding. Two different aspects of ensuring comprehension were brought up by the participants of the present study. First, Finnish can be used proactively to avoid miscomprehension and confusion.

Secondly, it can be employed in order to clear misunderstandings which have already occurred. In what follows one can find examples of the first type. Excerpt 25 exhibits the participant’s reflection on the possible benefits of L1 use.

Excerpt 25

Kyllähän sitä niinku voi totta kai käyttääkin, jos ryhmä sitä vaatii, jos ryhmässä on vaikka paljon heikkoja et sillee, et parempi sitä on sitte käyttää sitä äidinkieltä ohjeistuksissaki ja tällee, ettei heikoimmat tipu kelkasta, totta kai.

It can be used of course if the group needs it, if there are weak pupils in the group, then it’s better to use the mother tongue when giving instructions and so on, so that the weakest pupils don’t fall behind, of course.

The participant focused on the pupils’ ability to understand what the teacher says. In other words, the linguistic skills of the pupils were considered. It was implied that less competent learners may fail to understand the intended message. The L1 was seen as a means of keeping every pupil on track, regardless of their language skills. This notion was found also by de la Campa and Nassaji (2009) and Bateman (2008), whose studies proved that L1 use was sometimes caused by the limited language skills of the learners.

On the basis of the excerpt above it may be assumed that the participant was considering the pupil’s language skills and their ability to understand the target language used by the teacher.

Ensuring comprehension was considered also in relation to discussing content which is difficult for the learners to understand. The participant was asked in what situations Finnish should be spoken.

Excerpt 26

Jotku kielioppiasiat on yksinkertasesti sellasia, et koska niissä tulee sitä käsitteistöä tai sellasta niinku, mitä ei pystyis välttämättä selittämään englannilla. Siinä

kielioppihommissa, missä on käsitteistöä ja asioita, mitkä on äidinkielelläkin ehkä vaikeasti hahmotettavissa, että.. Niinku ei kaikki muista tai niinku ymmärrä tai hahmota välttämättä aina, et mikä oli verbi.

Some grammar issues are simply like that, because there is the terminology or things which you couldn’t necessarily explain in English. With grammar things in which there is the terminology and things which are maybe hard to grasp even in the first language, so.. Not everyone remembers or understands or grasps what a verb is.

The participant felt that if the topic (in this case grammar) is demanding considering pupil comprehension, Finnish can be employed in order to help the pupils to grasp the intended message. A similar opinion is expressed by Cook (2001a:156-157), who states that grammar can be taught in the L1 because the learners may not be able to understand complex grammar explanations if delivered in the target language. Furthermore, the participant focused on the cognitive skills of the learners, not necessarily on their linguistic skills. Bateman (2008) got similar results when studying student teachers’

language use. According to her study, the limited cognitive skills of the pupils were one of the causes for the teacher’s L1 use. It is also worth noting that Thompson (2006) and Victor (2009), among many others, found that the L1 was used for grammar instruction.

The excerpts presented above related to preventing misunderstandings by speaking Finnish. In the following excerpt the focus is on situations in which

miscomprehension has already taken place. In such a situation the pupil has failed to comprehend the message, for one reason or another. The following comment was made as the participant considered the possible benefits of employing Finnish in the classroom. Finnish was seen as the solution when the pupils experience difficulties in comprehending. Again, the participant seemed to be in favor of using the target language as the classroom language and speaking Finnish was seen as an exception or the last resort.

Excerpt 27

Pystytään niinku korjaamaan väärinymmärryksiä ja semmosia. Mä vaan toivoisin, et se ois vaa semmosissa tilanteissa, missä iha oikeesti niinku ei vaa muuten päästä

eteenpäin.

You can set straight miscomprehensions and the like. I’d just hope that it would be only in situations where you can’t proceed in any other way.

Eventhough the participant admitted that speaking Finnish has its benefits, using English as the medium of instruction was preferred over Finnish. Nevertheless, the participant felt that through Finnish the teacher can respond to confusion and miscomprehension and clarify the situation. This is in line with the findings of de la Campa and Nassaji (2009) and Bateman (2008). They found that the L1 was used in order to solve problems in understanding. In conclusion, the participants of the present study felt that Finnish can be used in order to help the pupils to comprehend, both by preventing miscomprehension and by attending to miscomprehension which has occurred.

Another learner-related use of Finnish was said to be enabling the pupils to participate in the conversation. When asked about a situation in which the L1 should be used, the participant presented as an example a situation in which she and the pupils had engaged in a conversation about wearing hats and using mobile phones in class.

Excerpt 28

Sillo jos oikeesti on pitäny keskustella asiasta, esimerkiks mulla tuli just niinku tää tommonen hattu/kännykkäkeskustelu, et se oli oikeesti semmonen pitempi, et mun mielestä se oli niinku ihan hyvä ehkä vetää sit suomeks, koska siinä mielessä oppilaatki ehkä sitte ajattelee, et he voi nyt kans vastata suomeks. Et siitä tuli niinku semmonen ihan aito keskustelutilanne. Jos sä haluat käydä jonku semmosen keskustelun just jostain tommosesta niinku tärkeestä vakavasta asiasta, mikä oikeesti koskee muitaki tunteja ku sitä enkun tuntia, et ihan koulun sääntöjä, ni hyvähän se varmaan on sitte ihan suomeks sanoa, koska sit myös ne oppilaat varmaan tuntee, että he ovat niinku samalla tasolla, et hekin voivat sanoa sitten heiän mielipiteensä asiasta. Sillo voi tulla

semmonen fiilis, et suomi on iha ok, ihan oikea kieli vetää asia.

If you really have to discuss something, for example I had this hat/phone conversation, it was really a longer one, so I think it was good to go through it in Finnish because in that sense the pupils feel that they can also answer in Finnish. So it became a real conversation. If you want to have a discussion over something important and serious like that, about something that doesn’t concern only the English class, about the school rules, then it is probably good to do it in Finnish because then the pupils feel that they are on the same level, that they can express their opinions. Then you might get the feeling that Finnish is ok, the right language in that situation.

The participant felt that by choosing Finnish as the language of the interaction the teacher can grant the pupils the permission to speak the L1 and thus give them the opportunity to participate in the conversation. This probably relates to the language skills of the pupils. If the language of the conversation were English, the pupils would not be fully able to take part in the discussion since they would not be able to express themselves fluently in the foreign language. Speaking Finnish in such a situation was seen as enabling pupil participation. In relation to this, Ferguson (2003:43) mentions that the teacher can use the L1 to encourage pupil involvement, because L1 use constitutes a warmer and more personal a relationship than speaking the target language would.